I'm sorry, but if you can't make such basic interpretations (e.g., what "Sure.'" meant), there's probably not much I can do for you.
Flat Tax and Tithing
- Thread starter The Thriller
- Start date
I'm sorry, but if you can't make such basic interpretations (e.g., what "Sure.'" meant), there's probably not much I can do for you.
That entire reply was argumentative and slightly mocking. If that is your idea of agreement then you have major work to do on your social skills.
candrew
Well-Known Member
When I was a kid growing up in Brooklyn Reverend Al marched in my neighborhood (mostly working class white). The leaders of both our Catholic and Protestant Churches contacted Al's people before the march and suggested instead of having a march that the congregations from both churches AND Reverend Al's people get together and have a prayer session at the local Little League Field. Reverend Al flat out rejected the idea and had his march.
That's quite an indictment. Too bad..
leftyjace
Well-Known Member
Fair point. Conditioning is a factor. I'm going to play devil's advocate for a second just for fun and to expand the breadth of the discussion.
To what extent do you justify compensating for conditioning? Is it fair to society to OVER-compensate for conditioning?
Conditioning will always be there. We're all a victim of it at one level or another. And, ironically, for those that are able, hard work can overcome conditioning. in my vastly limited experience dealing with people on both sides of the "success" fence, it is my impression that those who can overcome conditioning and resist the negative influences around them also tend to be those who take advantage of opportunities when presented to them, and in the right way.
I disagree with the premise that we need to afford people excessive opportunity and aide because they've been conditioned. To think that people don't have opportunity to improve their life right now is just flat-out wrong. Just because people refuse to leave their comfort zone and take drastic action to improve their lives and situation doesn't mean they haven't been afforded opportunities.
At some point people have to be responsible for their own actions, regardless of their past, or regardless of the social pressures they feel around them. Even more so than with right or wrong, legal or not, they should be held accountable for those decisions that directly impact their own well being and prosperity.
Taking from the rich and giving to those that refuse to use it properly or even at all for their own long-term well being is nothing but waste.
We can lead the horse to the water, and then let him decide whether to drink or not. We don't have to drug the horse, transport it via horsey-ambulance on a horsey-stretcher of feather pillows, give it a mani/pedi on the way, give it a phone so it can call it's horsey friends, gently crane it over to the edge of the water, and make sure it has a flexi-straw in his mouth.
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
I'll hit you where it hurts.
Read this paper published by a economically-libertarian University, who would typically hold beliefs very close to yours.
https://mises.org/rothbard/flattax.pdf
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
I honestly don't see your point here. Are you simply trying to discredit his point? Or are you trying to justify that taxing the poor 10% wouldn't be that bad because the poor usually just spend their money on exotic cheeses and expensive cell-phones?
Argumentative, sure. That's our thing. Mocking, not at all. I was agreeing with your statement of fact, but not your interpretation. No need to mock your facts, particularly when they were correct.
Why not have both the march and the prayer session? Why did having the prayer session negate the need the for the march?
D
Deleted member 848
Guest
Yup. Don't think too many people would disagree with you here
I'm coming from the perspective that I doubt that I could have been as successful in terms of chasing my dreams if I lived in Canada, than if I lived in the States. To put it simply. Of course, you could immediately think that I'm wrong, but I'm just giving you my opinion.
As far as the self-described novice part, its definitely true. I don't like to participate actively in conversations without having a good knowledge of the topic at hand.
To me, a flat-tax seems like a rather obvious mistake, so I figured that I'd point it out-- and I gave Gameface a paper from someone who is probably ideologically in-line with him, to show that a flat-tax isn't necessarily something that is always touted by those of the right. It's a pretty good paper btw, you should read it as well. It talks about how a flat-tax would negatively impact entrepreneurialism as well.
I agree it's an indictment, but I think we would disagree on who was indicted in that particular example.
I don't have much use for Sharpton generally, but I also don't have much use for middle-class white pastors telling him the "better way" to protest things. Too often, the "better way" is the one that makes the white pastors and/or their congregations the most comfortable.
I agree it's an indictment, but I think we would disagree on who was indicted in that particular example.
I don't have much use for Sharpton generally, but I also don't have much use for middle-class white pastors telling him the "better way" to protest things. Too often, the "better way" is the one that makes the white pastors and/or their congregations the most comfortable.
I must have missed the part where the race of the pastors was ever mentioned. Or even their wealth status for that matter.
As for the better way comment. That is all perspective. The ones that the march felt their way was better because it made them more comfortable.
As for an earlier comment you made. I agree. Why not join forces, have a large public joint prayer and then those that want to march can.
I don't disagree with the literal meaning of your words. However, when you are using terms like "OVER-compensate for conditioning" and "excessive opportunity and aide", it does make me wonder whether you think that would be any more compensation would be over-compensation and whether more opportunity and aide than currently exist would be excessive. It seems to me that you are deliberately loading your language.
I would also say that your notion of 'hard work overcoming conditioning' is itself the product of conditioning, and not a well-evidenced phenomenon.
Further, in this thread I've been primarily talking about investing in children and possibly young adults. Most are not at the stage where we consider them to be responsible for their own actions. Even men in their 20s are generally known for being irresponsible.
candrew
Well-Known Member
I agree it's an indictment, but I think we would disagree on who was indicted in that particular example.
I don't have much use for Sharpton generally, but I also don't have much use for middle-class white pastors telling him the "better way" to protest things. Too often, the "better way" is the one that makes the white pastors and/or their congregations the most comfortable.
I was a young teen at the time - but I don't think our religious leaders were "telling" Reverend Al how do anything. They were merely suggesting an alternative to marching through our neighborhood. But you'd think at the very least they could do both.
It also bears mentioning that the only reason he was marching through our neigborhood was because it was pre-dominantly white. There were no racial incidents associated with the march.
I'm not surprised.
Of course. That's why they marched. Marching is always so much more comfortable than sitting down to a picnic.
Yes, I know that's not how you meant "comfortable". However, I do agree with your point here, despite the joke.
I appreciate the support.
Then, how did they get to be predominately white? I assume you mean there weren't any lynchings/beatings/etc., but most racial incidents are much more subtle and harder to detect than that.
Quick story. My grandfather once risked 80% of his total worth to start a company in a depressed town that was desperately in need of jobs. He obviously believed in his idea and understood the risks.. but also was genuinely trying to help the town.
As part of the negotiation to put the required millions into the venture, he gained approval from both local and state government to have relief from both corporate income tax and sales tax for a period of years. As a result of years of struggle, unassuredness, and fortitude, the venture was considered a success. More than 700 employees were hired (with less than 10% at minimum wage) and the town then drew in more business because the community could better support those businesses. These brought even more jobs and now that town is flourishing.
I sincerely believe had it not been for my grandfather and forward thinking politicians the town would have failed or still be stuck in rough rut.
But you know what? Even though my grandfather receivee multiple humanitarian of year awards.. he still had some that resented his success ane felt it was unfair that he got to build his company free of taxes in the beginning.
As part of the negotiation to put the required millions into the venture, he gained approval from both local and state government to have relief from both corporate income tax and sales tax for a period of years. As a result of years of struggle, unassuredness, and fortitude, the venture was considered a success. More than 700 employees were hired (with less than 10% at minimum wage) and the town then drew in more business because the community could better support those businesses. These brought even more jobs and now that town is flourishing.
I sincerely believe had it not been for my grandfather and forward thinking politicians the town would have failed or still be stuck in rough rut.
But you know what? Even though my grandfather receivee multiple humanitarian of year awards.. he still had some that resented his success ane felt it was unfair that he got to build his company free of taxes in the beginning.
Ugh.
candrew
Well-Known Member
I think you're getting a little off the point - the original assertion is that Reverend Al Sharpton is/was not interested in ending racial tension. And I shared an anecdotal experience that suggests that this is true. I'm not interested in a sociological discussion.
I'm just pointing out that your anecdote doesn't mean when you purported it to mean. I don't even disagree about Sharpton.